Insurrection Hearings 6/28 and beyond

[Anonymous]

So, if Trump strangled his driver in an SUV that wasn't "the beast," that's better? You'd better take some medicine and try to get the fever down. You might start thinking more clearly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if Trump strangled his driver in an SUV that wasn't "the beast," that's better? You'd better take some medicine and try to get the fever down. You might start thinking more clearly.

There's an easy way to clear this up. Tony Ornato and Mark Meadows, come on down.

[Anonymous]

Apparently today’s testimony was just an appetizer to what’s to come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I NEVER EVER thought I say this. Liz Chaney deserves to be President…whether you agree or disagree with her beliefs she is by far the most honorable member of our govt BY FAR. Dems and Repubs rally around messages vs governing in principle…she had everything to loose and STILL did the ri GB thing. She is the only reason why all this is getting out

Uh no, doing a good job at this hearing doesn't deserve her the presidency. Beliefs matter above all when we vote for president.

+1
I’m not falling for any pro-GOP propaganda about Cheney. She does not deserve to be anything. She is doing this one thing correctly, end of list. I do not find her to be honorable in any other fashion. She’s still a Republican.

I disagree. I'm a centrist Democrat and I'm incredibly impressed with her and would vote for her, even though I thought her dad was the devil incarnate and I'm pretty sure there isn't much of anything I'd like in her platform. So tired of the endless succession of opportunistic, gutless, weather vanes that got us to this point.

I'm an at least lefty Democrat, and I would not be afraid for the country under her leadership. I wouldn't like it, but by goddamn it would be legal and just, and lead honorably.

I just don't agree with any of her political opinions otherwise, but that's how it goes when you have multiple political parties.

Well except for the whole Roe thing, but yeah

She agrees with the SCOTUS decision and that is terrifying.

The hearing's two hours sure went by quickly and IMO it got better at the end. No one here could explain why Hutchinson's statements would not be considered hearsay in a court room. This former Federal prosecutor explains in a great thread:

She lies trump wasn't even in the beast as per new reports.

She's the larger one on the left

She never specifically said he was in The Beast.

Cool cool. Now find photos that show there weren’t men in trees with ARs that Trump wasn’t at all concerned about because they were only there to hurt the Other Side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what is the trump-lovers response to today? I know Fox isn’t covering it but I’m sure some of trump’s supporters have an explanation.

According to my MAGA uncle, Hutchinson is lying because Trump wouldn't hire her at Mar-a-Lago. This is her retaliation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the trump-lovers response to today? I know Fox isn’t covering it but I’m sure some of trump’s supporters have an explanation.

According to my MAGA uncle, Hutchinson is lying because Trump wouldn't hire her at Mar-a-Lago. This is her retaliation.

There's an awful lot of talk of hearsay from the internet lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the trump-lovers response to today? I know Fox isn’t covering it but I’m sure some of trump’s supporters have an explanation.

According to my MAGA uncle, Hutchinson is lying because Trump wouldn't hire her at Mar-a-Lago. This is her retaliation.

Wow. The bitter woman scorned defense. As old as time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the trump-lovers response to today? I know Fox isn’t covering it but I’m sure some of trump’s supporters have an explanation.

According to my MAGA uncle, Hutchinson is lying because Trump wouldn't hire her at Mar-a-Lago. This is her retaliation.

There's an awful lot of talk of hearsay from the internet lawyers.

It’s not a criminal court of law, guys. I have no doubt they have more witnesses to verify either in deposition or to come.

Watch any congressional hearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so basically POTUS is a toddler. jeez. this is insane.

Yeah, that behavior is not admirable but it's not impeachable or criminal. Wasn't LBJ as badly behaved or worse?

The more important parts of her testimony were how Meadows and Trump knew everything and wanted violence.

He assaulted his security detail. That is a crime.

A small c crime. For a president, it's not important.

Sheesh.

I don't understand this....you don't think it's important that a president assaulted someone on his team? But, I guess he knew he assaulted women before he was elected.

I like presidents who don't assault people, or try to overthrow the government, or say that the VP deserves to be hanged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the trump-lovers response to today? I know Fox isn’t covering it but I’m sure some of trump’s supporters have an explanation.

According to my MAGA uncle, Hutchinson is lying because Trump wouldn't hire her at Mar-a-Lago. This is her retaliation.

There's an awful lot of talk of hearsay from the internet lawyers.

Internet lawyers should know that this wasn’t a trial, so hearsay rules don’t apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I NEVER EVER thought I say this. Liz Chaney deserves to be President…whether you agree or disagree with her beliefs she is by far the most honorable member of our govt BY FAR. Dems and Repubs rally around messages vs governing in principle…she had everything to loose and STILL did the ri GB thing. She is the only reason why all this is getting out

Uh no, doing a good job at this hearing doesn't deserve her the presidency. Beliefs matter above all when we vote for president.

+1
I’m not falling for any pro-GOP propaganda about Cheney. She does not deserve to be anything. She is doing this one thing correctly, end of list. I do not find her to be honorable in any other fashion. She’s still a Republican.

I disagree. I'm a centrist Democrat and I'm incredibly impressed with her and would vote for her, even though I thought her dad was the devil incarnate and I'm pretty sure there isn't much of anything I'd like in her platform. So tired of the endless succession of opportunistic, gutless, weather vanes that got us to this point.

I'm an at least lefty Democrat, and I would not be afraid for the country under her leadership. I wouldn't like it, but by goddamn it would be legal and just, and lead honorably.

I just don't agree with any of her political opinions otherwise, but that's how it goes when you have multiple political parties.

Well except for the whole Roe thing, but yeah

She agrees with the SCOTUS decision and that is terrifying.

The hearing's two hours sure went by quickly and IMO it got better at the end. No one here could explain why Hutchinson's statements would not be considered hearsay in a court room. This former Federal prosecutor explains in a great thread:

She lies trump wasn't even in the beast as per new reports.

She's the larger one on the left

As if "on the left" wasn't enough. Oh, my dude, if size is that important to you, you should know that picture is photoshopped. All the space between KM's legs is wiped out of shading and the lines that should be cutting through from one side to the other. It's whittled away elsewhere, too, but less obviously.

If you are getting your info from places that post photoshopped pictures, you'd best cast a jaundiced eye on the rest of it. Someone is leading you down a garden path.

I did a reverse search and its from yahoo

https://news.yahoo.com/who-is-cassidy-hutchinson-and-what-has-she-told-the-jan-6-committee-214435600.html

LOL I guess Jonathan Ernst/Reuters was trying to make them look bad

Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson, left, with White House press secretary Kaleigh McEnany in 2020. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

[Anonymous]

And if CH is "big", you try standing next to KM. And if the facts are too much for you, attack what a woman looks like.

You guys REALLY need some new material.

When Tucker gives you your talking points, come back so we can rip them apart with the truth.

[Anonymous]

LOL if Musk allows trump back on twitter you'd get these
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-cassidy-hutchinson-testimony-truth-social-reaction-1720060

"Her Fake story that I tried to grab the steering wheel of the White House Limousine in order to steer it to the Capitol Building is 'sick' and fraudulent, very much like the Unselect Committee itself—Wouldn't even have been possible to do such a ridiculous thing."

In another post, Trump disputed her allegation that he was upset security would not let people carrying weapons into his January 6 speech.

"I didn't want or request that we make room for people with guns to watch my speech. Who would ever want that? Not me!" he wrote.

He continued lashing out against Hutchinson in a series of other posts, dubbing her "a Total Phony!!!" and "a third rate social climber."

"Her body language is that of a total bull.... artist. Fantasy Land!" Trump wrote.

Even still, others who have been following the investigation said Hutchinson's testimony was among the most compelling presented so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cheney to General Flynn: "Do you believe in the peaceful transition of power in the U.S.?"

General Flynn: "Fifth."

That's terrifying.

Always remember that his brother was the Army Chief of Operations, was one of the people that orevented the DC Nat Guard from being deployed (a fact that the DOD lied about), and was given a promotion. All of this was in the timeframe in question.

He's currenty in charge of Pacific Command.

Being related to a treason-weasel isn't a crime. I haven't seen anything to suggest that the brother is loony, only Flynn. And he's been a loon for a long time.

Except the Flynn brother significantly delayed troop support to the Capitol Police. It's not a stretch to believe that he was in on the coup and wanted the rioters to succeed.

No. We can agree to disagree but I believe that was the right call. The insurrectionists were handled very well by the Capitol Police and by MPD. The National Guard and other troops were not needed and should not have been called there.

Strongly disagree. A Cap. Policemen DIED and others asked for back up repeatedly. A capitol policewoman testified it was a war zone that she was not qualified to deal with. The Flynn brother knew this and chose to do nothing. He was in dereliction of his duty, because he was BIASED: the worst explanation is that he wanted the coup to succeed. The best explanation is that he thought it wouldn’t and he did not wish to annoy the WH by harming the rioters, “Trump’s people”. I plump for the former.

Either you’re too uninformed to be writing opinions like these, or you’re in with the traitors, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cheney to General Flynn: "Do you believe in the peaceful transition of power in the U.S.?"

General Flynn: "Fifth."

That's terrifying.

Always remember that his brother was the Army Chief of Operations, was one of the people that orevented the DC Nat Guard from being deployed (a fact that the DOD lied about), and was given a promotion. All of this was in the timeframe in question.

He's currenty in charge of Pacific Command.

Being related to a treason-weasel isn't a crime. I haven't seen anything to suggest that the brother is loony, only Flynn. And he's been a loon for a long time.

Except the Flynn brother significantly delayed troop support to the Capitol Police. It's not a stretch to believe that he was in on the coup and wanted the rioters to succeed.

No. We can agree to disagree but I believe that was the right call. The insurrectionists were handled very well by the Capitol Police and by MPD. The National Guard and other troops were not needed and should not have been called there.

Strongly disagree. A Cap. Policemen DIED and others asked for back up repeatedly. A capitol policewoman testified it was a war zone that she was not qualified to deal with. The Flynn brother knew this and chose to do nothing. He was in dereliction of his duty, because he was BIASED: the worst explanation is that he wanted the coup to succeed. The best explanation is that he thought it wouldn’t and he did not wish to annoy the WH by harming the rioters, “Trump’s people”. I plump for the former.

Either you’re too uninformed to be writing opinions like these, or you’re in with the traitors, PP.

+1.